DGMENT MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- This petition is directed against the judgment dated 14.9.1998 of the Lahore High Court through which appeal filed by the petitioners arising from acquisition proceedings has been dismissed.
2. The land in dispute measuring 49 kanals, 2 marlas situated in Tehsil Pasrur District Sialkot was acquired in 1988 through notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the benefit of the respondent-WAPDA for construction of a Grid Station. The compensation was warded to the petitioners-owners at the rate of Rs.566.18 through award made by the Collector on 22.8.1990. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners made reference u/S. 18 of the Act which was decided by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Sialkot through judgment dated 4.10.1995 and the compensation of land was enhanced to Rs.2000/- pre marla. In addition thereto, the petitioners were also ordered to be paid an amount equivalent to 15% as compulsory acquisition charges. They feeling aggrieved filed appeal before the Lahore High Court which has been dismissed through the judgment impugned in this petition dated 14.9.1998, against which leave is sought.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents raised objection that this Court in the case of Water and Power Development Authority through Chief Engineer v. Saadullah Khan and others (1999 SCM R 319) has finally resolved that in such cases arising from acquisition proceedings, direct appeal as a matter of right lies to this Court though previously, there was difference of opinion, therefore, this petition was not maintainable. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners under bona fide belief on the basis of previous position of law as declared by this Court about which there was difference of opinion about maintainability of direct appeal, filed the petition for leave to appeal which may be converted into appeal and decided accordingly after condoning the delay as the petitioners were not wholly at fault.
4. We would convert this petition into appeal and proceed to decide the same as such. The office is directed to register the same as an appeal and the appellant are directed to make deficiency in Court-fee within a period of one mouth failing which, it shall be placed before the Bench for dismissal.
5. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted with reference to site-plan Exh.A1 proved by the Patwari about the situation of land on the road side that the potentials of the land were not kept into consideration while determining the compensation both by the Collector and the learned Senior Civil Judge, as well. The decision has been based on sale mutations referred in the evidence of Patwari without determining whether the said land was similarly situated on the Lahore-Pasrur road as the land of the appellants was.
6. The contention appears to have force. It is clear from site 'plan Exh.A1 that the land of the appellants was situated at Lahore-Pasrur road out of which a portion has been acquired and in order to give approach from road to the portion acquired from Lahore-Pasrur road, a khasra number has also been acquired to make the passage, The other land of the appellant on the road side which has not been acquired has also been adversely affected in its value or account of construction of the Grid Station. The portion of the lard which has been acquired was, before acquisition connected with the Lahore-Pasrur road, therefore, this aspect of the case should have received consideration by the Courts which was the material aspect which could not be ignored.
7. Keeping in view the potentials of the land on account of its situation on the Lahore-Pasrur road and the other attending circumstances, we hold that compensation at the rate of Rs.2000/- per marla granted to the appellants is not sufficient. They have not produced any direct evidence about sale made of the land similarly situated in the area, therefore, we would grant compensation at the rate of Rs.3000/- per marla in order to do complete justice. Needless to say that the appellants shall be granted 15% over and above this amount as compulsory acquisition charges, They shall also be. Paid compound interest at the rate of 8% from the date of taking over possession of the land by the respondents-up to the date of its payment to the appellants.
8. The appeal is accepted in the above terms with no order as to costs.